MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

P25 Cognitive Differential Diagnosis of Hepatic Encephalopathy in a Cohort of Outpatients With Chronic Liver Disease

2023· article· en· W4387041360 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Kheloufi Lyès, Sultanik Philippe, Apolline Leproux, Antoine Santiago, Charlotte Bouzbib, Sarah Mouri, Marika Rudler, Nicolas Weiss, Dominique Thabut

Bibliographic record

VenueThe American Journal of Gastroenterology · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicLiver Disease and Transplantation
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineHepatic encephalopathyInternal medicineCirrhosisChronic liver diseaseCohortLiver diseaseAlcoholic liver diseaseMontreal Cognitive AssessmentPediatricsDementiaDisease

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Covert hepatic encephalopathy (CHE) is a complex and multifactorial complication of chronic liver diseases (CLD). Other etiologies may cause neurocognitive impairment (NI) independently form the liver condition, making the differential diagnosis difficult using cognitive tests. The aim of this study was to search for cognitive tools enabling to identify patients with CHE, taking into account the presence of other sources of NI. Methods: Retrospective analysis of a prospective cohort of patients with CLD (March 2018-November 2022) referred to our outpatient clinics for suspicion of CHE. Multimodal work-up was performed in our multidisciplinary team: hepatologists, neurologist, neuropsychologist, biomarkers, electroencephalogram (EEG) and brain MRI (MRI). An adjudication committee involving the aforementioned physicians made the diagnosis of CHE. Results: 164 patients were included: 77% cirrhosis (alcohol/MASH/virus in 62/54/16%), 23% portosinusoïdal vascular liver disease. 70% had a previous history of HE, among them 98% had ammonia-lowering medications. Overall, 63% patients were diagnosed with CHE, 37% with other causes of NI, 26% with no NI and 26% with mix causes of NI. Only 37% of them had CHE without other causes of NI. Age, prevalence of cirrhosis, cardiovascular risk factors, and alcohol abuse were similar between CHE and non-CHE groups. BMI and MASH patients were higher in the CHE group (respectively p = 0.048 and p =0.001). MoCA test (P=0.049), PHES (P=0.003), ANT (P=0.001), reflexive praxis (P=0.042), verbal digit span (P=0.023) and of Rey’s Figure copy (P=0.006) were significantly lower in CHE patients. Among patients with exposure to neurological risk factors, 70 % were diagnosed with CHE. Only the ANT (P=0.032) and the verbal digit span (P=0.005) were found significantly worse in these patients. When taking into account the presence of neurological comorbidities, the assessment of memory enabled to separate patients with neurological illnesses from patients without, independently from HE diagnosis. Conclusion: The diagnosis of HE based on NI is complicated. Validated tests (PHES, ANT) can be sensitive for HE but for other neurological damage as well, they are also found to be worse in patients with mix causes of NI. The assessment of memory seems to be an important factor for differential diagnosis.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.008
GPT teacher head0.243
Teacher spread0.235 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe American Journal of Gastroenterology→Same topicLiver Disease and Transplantation→French-language works237,207→